Page 6 of 28 « First 45 6 7816 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
skalogre's Avatar
skalogre is offline skalogre
2010-06-21 , 16:15
Posts: 327 | Thanked: 249 times | Joined on Sep 2009 @ Λεμεσιανός, ρε!
#51
Originally Posted by Flandry View Post
Proposed addition:
  • No Abuse, Insults or Personal Attacks
    Abuse, insults and personal attacks directed at any member, person, or group are unacceptable. If you disagree with someone on some point, please do not resort to name calling or personal attacks; instead, argue the merits of their points. Please note that attacking people you perceive to be "trolls", "fanbois" or "flame baiters" still counts as a personal attack, and your posts will be removed as such.
    • Trolling example: "Just sell your N900 and get an iPhone 4!"
    • Flaming example: "Members with nothing to say should just shut up and leave this forum!"
    • Personal attack example: "You are an idiot."
    If you have trouble refraining from taking "bait", consider making use of the built-in ignore list functionality.
  • No Foul Language


Any objections?
None here; I think it would be a good idea to have a reminder, maybe more people would use it. Maybe we should also need to add something about not quoting trolls or the bait? Only partially joking.
 
inidrog's Avatar
inidrog is offline inidrog
2010-06-21 , 16:17
Posts: 266 | Thanked: 89 times | Joined on Jan 2010 @ Norway
#52
I will wait eagerly for the outcome of this thread. !
__________________
---

"Sex is not the answer. Sex is the question. Yes is the answer..."
 
woody14619's Avatar
woody14619 is offline woody14619
2010-06-21 , 16:18
Posts: 1,455 | Thanked: 3,309 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY
#53
I like the policy... I think it provides a pretty reasonable warning window, and the lower-end "punishments" (account posting privs disabled for a day to a week) are reasonable.

I also like the idea about preventing someone for posting multiple times in a row to the same thread. I think that would be a nice way to encourage clean usage. I would recommend if that happens though at there be an option to "bump" the thread on an edit.

I think it's worth trying it out for a week or two and seeing how it goes, then re-opening the discussion to see how people like the new policy. I'm sure there will be a few adjustments and things will again go smoothly.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post:
Nathraiben's Avatar
Nathraiben is offline Nathraiben
2010-06-21 , 16:22
Posts: 267 | Thanked: 408 times | Joined on May 2010 @ Austria
#54
Originally Posted by ysss View Post
Cmon guys, the mods won't turn into monsters overnight..
Been there, seen that.

Once a community grows large enough that the administrators run out of close buddies to assign as moderators, the zealots will automatically come.

And that's not even a bad thing, as long as the rules are sensible, because as long as they only target the bad boys, zealots will help clear a forum of them.

And these rules are made to protect 'us' anyway..
But once again, I don't see how some of those rules are protecting "us" in any way. Have you really ever come across a signature that you felt the need of being protected from?

Really, some of those rules feel like they've been C&Ped from other forums without any real reason to be installed on TMO.

I'm sure there'll be some reasonable grace period for this to take into full effect and friendly reminders/warnings for unintentional rule breaking.
I'm pretty sure these won't hit us any time soon, really. But once they do, they might hit us hard.

Imagine you're getting punished for publishing 6 lines of HELPFUL links in your signature, something that was considered okay for 5 years. Would you feel hurt? Would you consider not only deleting those links form your signature, but also turning your back on a community that, instead of getting rid of real offenders, is now targeting at you for being HELPFUL?

....right?
 
inidrog's Avatar
inidrog is offline inidrog
2010-06-21 , 16:24
Posts: 266 | Thanked: 89 times | Joined on Jan 2010 @ Norway
#55
Is it OK to thank someone for opening their mind "for a useful post" even if you don't agree with the content?, or is a "Thanks!" = I agree?
__________________
---

"Sex is not the answer. Sex is the question. Yes is the answer..."
 
Nathraiben's Avatar
Nathraiben is offline Nathraiben
2010-06-21 , 16:33
Posts: 267 | Thanked: 408 times | Joined on May 2010 @ Austria
#56
Originally Posted by woody14619 View Post
I also like the idea about preventing someone for posting multiple times in a row to the same thread. I think that would be a nice way to encourage clean usage. I would recommend if that happens though at there be an option to "bump" the thread on an edit.
Right now I feel like I'm playing devil's advocate here, but I really wonder: What harm does replying to a thread more than once? Normally, one only does that when adding something after a certain span of time, anyway - and from your words I read that you already realise that loosing the "bump" functionality would indeed be a big disadvantage.

So where would be the advantage of implementing a complicated bump-on-edit system compared to someone simply being allowed to reply even if the last post was made by themselves?

Again this seems to be C&Ped from other forums where it actually might make sense (for example because of people artificially raising their post count for added benefits).
 
xomm's Avatar
xomm is offline xomm
2010-06-21 , 16:38
Posts: 609 | Thanked: 243 times | Joined on Jan 2010 @ Eastern USA
#57
Originally Posted by Nathraiben View Post
Why make those rules, anyway? Someone having a second account (not just for spamming and flaming) doesn't hurt the community at all.
Originally Posted by Helmuth View Post
But I had to admit, I have myself 2 total seperate accounts here at maemo.org. (this one and a other one)
Originally Posted by Reggie View Post
You should be fine. It only becomes an issue when members with infractions or banned members start creating new accounts, thus:

"If a member who has accumulated infraction points is proved to be posting on a second account (via IP address), the account with a higher number of posts will get the additional infraction, and the newer account will be banned permanently."
Reggie has said that's only a problem when you've started to get infractions. If you're clean, it shouldn't be a problem.
__________________
==In school once again. Free time limited to night, holidays and weekends.==
Hi! I'm Andy, a Maemo Greeter! I'm also a moderator of the Applications, Nokia N900, and Maemo 5/Fremantle forums.
Useful Links: Maemo Wiki Main Page, New users start here, Beginners' wiki page, Maemo5 101, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
 Also, pin yourself in the map! Maemo Map. Send me a PM (Private Message) if I leave you hanging on a problem (or if you need more help).
 Owner of both a N800 and N900; Active community member since Jan 2010. You've been xommified! - My blog.
 
Flandry's Avatar
Flandry is offline Flandry
2010-06-21 , 16:38
Posts: 1,559 | Thanked: 1,786 times | Joined on Oct 2009 @ Boston
#58
I guess i need to add this to the OP as it has already been ignored:

Originally Posted by Flandry View Post
In response to several comments past and future: obviously these are guidelines and will not be enforced to the letter every moment of everyday. Not only is that not practical but it's not desirable as there will always be some judgement involved and the idea is to promote a constructive environment, not to make everyone move in lockstep (or goose-step as some like to claim any time a hint of order is maintained by "artificial" means).

The point is to clarify what is and isn't appropriate so that the proper response can be determined by any moderator, thus enabling a team of moderators to act more consistently and with less overhead (overhead which you don't see because it is mulled over in the moderator forum). For this, a more detailed policy is needed than has existed, and this is it.
Regarding serial posting, i added that language to the No Spamming portion, which reads like this:

Threads that are not related to the forum's description, posts that are not related to the discussion, or posts made with the intention of bringing the user's post count up will be considered to be spam. An edit function is provided by the forum software and should be used to minimize multiple sequential posts.

Seems to me that the moderators are not the ones taking rules to extremes that weren't intended, but the ones responding to them.
__________________

Unofficial PR1.3/Meego 1.1 FAQ
***
Classic example of arbitrary Nokia decision making. Couldn't just fallback to the no brainer of tagging with lat/lon if network isn't accessible, could you Nokia?
MAME: an arcade in your pocket
Accelemymote: make your accelerometer more joy-ful
Last edited by Flandry; 2010-06-21 at 16:43. Reason: Emphasis added
 

The Following User Says Thank You to Flandry For This Useful Post:
timoph is offline timoph
2010-06-21 , 16:45
Posts: 415 | Thanked: 732 times | Joined on Jan 2009 @ Finland
#59
Originally Posted by fpp View Post
Oh no it isn't, unfortunately, and you've hit the nail right on the head there.
Not sure if I left my thumb between the hammer and the nail

Originally Posted by fpp View Post
And that's not the newbies' fault.
No it's not their fault. I just think this increased popularity causes the need for more stricter moderation. Just to keep everyone a happy camper and not loose too much of the older crowd.

Change always causes resistance. It has to - it's physics.
"To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction."
- Newton's 3rd law of motion

Can't argue with physics
 
Nathraiben's Avatar
Nathraiben is offline Nathraiben
2010-06-21 , 16:56
Posts: 267 | Thanked: 408 times | Joined on May 2010 @ Austria
#60
Originally Posted by xomm View Post
Reggie has said that's only a problem when you've started to get infractions. If you're clean, it shouldn't be a problem.
Originally Posted by Flandry View Post
Seems to me that the moderators are not the ones taking rules to extremes that weren't intended, but the ones responding to them.
I'll willingly break the rules to make a second account once I've been banned by any future moderators - just so I can PM you a big fat "Haha!" then...

Really, I see where you're coming from, and I don't think any of you are zealots - but can you voucher for the future moderators? I have just seen too many communities grow since the 90th to believe that you will be able to keep the moderators at the current level.

Keep the rules clean from unnecessary rules now and you won't have an angry mob of users later.
 
Reply
Page 6 of 28 « First 45 6 7816 Last »

Tags
commandments, community, infractions, rules, t.m.o. policy

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 21:02.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top